Montresor is one of the character in the book that any stranger would not wish to meet in an underground cemetery or anywhere in life. He is cold and merciless killer. He not only likes murdering, but he also believes it is essential. As the narrator he is recounting the story of five decades after it occurred. This raises a complicated question of if Montresor is reliable or unreliable. Thus, it obvious to say that Montresor is a typical example of unreliable narrator, this is because he was able to plaster Fortunato into a dome and hence kill him over small issue making it impossible to trust him.
Montresor, the protagonist is an unreliable narrator for various reasons. To begin with, he is obviously emotionally unstable, and he conspicuously shifts between same views. One example of the dissimilar perceptions that Montresor uses is that he appears to be cannily good and sociable to both the audience and Fortunato although he does not even have a clue of audience’s characteristics and he is after killing the deprived Fortunato (Rocks 50). He even attempts to defend the killing of Fortunato by stating that killing links to his family slogan, which in the Latin saying means, “No one attacks me without revenge.”
Additionally, Montresor ends his story with “In pace requiescat,” which means “May his soul rest in peace,” when talking about the dead Fortunato whom he had a disagreed with previously (Poe 17). This appears like he striving with two conflicting opinions of himself and is not sure of how to behave and think around humanity, a common intellectual cycle associated with killers and offenders.
Montresor is mentally challenged and that makes him unreliable narrators. The audience are not certain what wrong Fortunato did to him but his mind is fully occupied with his mission to revenge. To execute his mission, Montresor released the other staffs for a holiday in order to remain with Fortunato alone. Moreover, he intentionally left his stonework or masonry equipment in the crypts. This was a scheme to tempt Fortunato into following him (Dern 53). To prove his unreliability, he gave some unclear detail on how Fortunato was supposed to pay for his abuses and because he had not attempted to make things right, he (Montresor) thought he would take matters into his hands and punish Fortunato himself (Rocks 51). Generally, Montresor evidently has hyper predispositions and misapprehensions of grandeur.
Montresor is not a factual individual but a character created by Poe Allan. It is unbelievable that Poe wanted to portray his narrator as unreliable. This is because that would throw his story into dilemma. However, Montresor is perfect example of someone who is not reliable whose behavior and actions exposes the way his character or madness influences what informs the readers (Rocks 51). The manner in which Montresor is capable of reading Fortunato’s character and detect his weakness which he can use to bring him down, indicates the type of illegal psychopathic generous that Montresor is. As the story progresses, the character of Montresor’s unreliability is exposed, the audience is able to see more and more degree of Montresor’s evil and depravation nature (Rodríguez 37). He is the kind of character that seems to have entire disconnect within him. One of the desired parts of the story is in the last paragraph after the death of Fortunato, his unreliability is demonstrated in the manner in which he was totally blind to the reason behind his emotions and feelings.
Montresor’s unreliability as a narrator is revealed in the way he discovers his emotional state but then is fast to explain that it does not correspond to criminal act he just executed. His hurry to explain that his unexpected attack has nothing to do with regret but for the reason that environment shows how he lacks self-awareness, or emotional intelligence (Rodríguez 39). This causes the readers to question everything that narrator has explained, as well as whether the many injuries of Fortunato are normally figment or real of Montresor’s imagination.
Montresor is a killer and is full of himself hence cannot be relied on. That is, he allows pride to rule him. At one point, he said that the weak point of Fortunato is his pride, which is quite sarcastic since it also appears to be his own, and he does not support his allegations. Fortunato was also too proud to miss a chance to prove Montresor wrong. For instance, in the wine incident, Fortunato knew Montresor was willing to find the other expert of wine in town Luchesi, but Fortunato was not ready to here and give advice on that (Dern 55). That means Fortunato knew that Montresor had overpaid for the wine, and he felt to be superior judge of the wine. If was not so proud and eager to substantiate that Montresor played for a fool, he would have remained safely above the ground.
Thus, Montresor managed to prove Fortunato’s dreadful pride (he was eager to sacrifice his health to prove wrong Montresor) and the intention of Fortunato to insult him. This however does not provide an appropriate answer to kill a person, but there an indication that it was not all in the imagination of Montresor (Rodríguez 39). And since Montresor cannot provide evidence on the reason why he killed Fortunato, it means he is unreliable and cannot be trusted if he says Fortunato had aggrieved him. This is not clear, and even if Montresor had given the evidence, it could still be hard to trust him since he was unreliable narrator. This means he could be coming up with fictional story. It does not take longer period to search for evidence to prove that Montresor cannot be reliable due to his fatal plot and because he was remorseful and emotionless for what he was doing (Rodríguez 41). To make matter worse he was happier with his plans and did not feel the regrets.
The narrator (Montresor)can be characterized as spiteful, jealous and crazed man who ends up bricking his ally behind a wall to make sure his demise and he did that with enjoyment and panache. Thus, it is impossible to rely heavily on him and he is not essentially trustworthy. He might be depended on to have voiced the events of the real story precisely since he can, but before the story happens there is no clear objective picture (Rodríguez 43). For instance, why was Montresor angry with Fortunato and did Fortunato actually deserve such unkindness?
The only evidence that the reader gets to this query is the Montresor’s words himself. Where he explains that “1000 wounds of Fortunato I had tolerated as best as I possibly will, but when he expressed on insult I swore vengeance” (Poe 17). Thus, it is impossible to say with surety that the reasons for narrator’s vengeance are justified. Therefore, the narrator is somehow unreliable, because his wholly mission is predicated on something that he considers earnest for vengeance, without informing the reader what it was.
Montresor does not give evidence that punishment executed fits or is applicable to the offense, this is because the reader does not really know what crime is. Hedging him up bears no link as far as the audience comprehend to what was done by Fortunato (Dern 57). Since Montresor does not provide so much information that the reader can assess his actions, it impossible to depend or rely on him.
Montresor is unreliable narrator for the reason of his deranged behavior and attitude toward Fortunato. His conduct toward Fortunato was also disconnected from the narrative reports about his events and behavior leading to Fortunato’s funeral (Dern 59). From this, it acceptable that Montresor’s reports on crimes against Fortunato were accurate through a maladapted communal angle. Thus, it is acceptable that Montresor executed a frightening act as he states having executed it.
In summary it can be argued that Montresor is telling his narrative to a police officer or a psychiatrist. It can also be proposed that he is telling his story to a successor, a member of his family to whom the fortune’s character beneficiary is exactly and vainly drawn: a beneficiary that Montresor is exposing his soul whereas anticipating it to be respected (for maintaining the decency of the family) (Dern 61). Thus, from this argument, it can be concluded that Montresor is informally maladapted but perceptively accurate and acute. This information makes Montresor appear unreliable narrator due to the fact that he gives an unconceivable realism to a terrible story of “sworn retaliation” as well as “chastisement with impunity.”
Work cited
Dern, John A. "Poe's Public Speakers: Rhetorical Strategies in" The Tell-Tale Heart" and" The Cask of Amontillado." The Edgar Allan Poe Review (2001): 53-70.
Poe, Edgar A. The Cask of Amontillado. San Francisco: Otbebookpublishing, 2017.
Rocks, James E. “Conflict and Motive in “the Cask of Amontillado.” Poe Studies‐Old Series 5.2 (1972): 50-51.
Rodríguez, Julián. “Parody and Language in ‘The Cask Of Amontillado By Allan Poe’.” Atlantis 7.1/2 (1985): 37-47.
